[LinuxFailSafe] RE: Is Linux FailSafe Actively Maintained?

[David Brower]

linuxfailsafe-request@lists.community.tummy.com wrote:

> Message: 1
> From: Robert Meiners <robert.meiners@gonicus.de>
> Organization: GONICUS GmbH
> To: linuxfs@infinitefunctions.com
> Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 12:27:34 +0100
> Cc: linuxfailsafe@lists.community.tummy.com
> Subject: [LinuxFailSafe] RE: Is Linux FailSafe Actively Maintained?
> 
> =2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Okay,
> 
> the developers said, that the aktive development is stopped.
> But they also said, that the current version is running.
> However, another solution would be kimberlite.
> We realized some projects in combination with oracle.
> But by this System you are bounded on two nodes
> and you need a shared storage with a simulanious access, e. g. a RAID-Array.
> 
> Greetings=20

For the original question, shared storage was going to be needed
anyway, because the application was an Oracle failover.   The database
being failed over has state that needs to be accessible from storage.

Once there is shared storage, an Oracle user might find it more
effective to run the Oracle RAC flavor of the database, which lets
you use all the nodes of a cluster at the same time rather than one
at a time as in a failover environment.

-dB